1. Transverse polarization for energy calibration at Z-peak M. Koratzinos With valuable input from Alain Blondel ICFA HF2014, Sunday, 12/10/2014

2. Other talks in this workshop Please also see the following talks in this workshop: – Ivan Koop, “Polarization issues and schemes for energy calibration” – Eliana Gianfelice, “Polarization issues in FCC-ee collider” – Ivan Koop “Maintaining polarization in synchrotrons” – More talks follow in this session… M. Koratzinos2

3. This talk I will try not to repeat what others have so eloquently reported in this conference I will make a suggestion for a possible strategy for depolarization measurements This is work in progress! M. Koratzinos3

4. Why? Transverse depolarization is unique to circular machines and an extremely accurate method to measure the beam energy The beam energy in a large circular collider changes continuously by many times the desired accuracy (fewX100keV) Important to monitor this change continuously (at LEP we used this method only at the end of a fill and only for some fills) M. Koratzinos4

5. The bottom line I cannot resist to give it all away: The good news for CEPC: polarization at the Z should be easier than at FCC-ee The bad news for CEPC: cannot guarantee polarization at the W threshold (80GeV beam energy) M. Koratzinos5

6. Polarization vs energy and ring circumference Theory says the energy spread goes like  E  E b 2 /  Polarization levels are inversely proportional to the energy spread So a ring with 16 times the diameter will have the same polarization level at twice the beam energy Data exists for LEP at different energies (only optimised for 45 and 60 GeV) M. Koratzinos6

7. Measurements from LEP M. Koratzinos7 47.659.571.483.295.1107.0118.9CEPC TLEP55.569.483.297.1111.0124.9138.7 : Not optimized

8. CEPC polarization at 80GeV If the amount of effort to reduce depolarizing effects is like at LEP, no polarization will be seen at 80GeV This is in contrast to FCC-ee, where 80GeV is (just) possible (always extrapolating from the LEP experience) M. Koratzinos8

9. Z running: the problem At the Z peak we need extremely accurate beam energy knowledge all the time There exists a method that gives excellent instantaneous accuracy: resonant depolarization. Error is 100KeV (a big chunk of it is arguably a ‘statistical’ type error, going down with the number of measurements) Environmental parameters change the energy by many times this amount in the space of minutes/hours: – Tides: time constant of 1h – Trains: time constant of few mins – Water level: time constant a few months – Temperature: few hours Other parameters that change the energy is the RF system (standard offsets plus corrections for changing running conditions. This can give also differences between the energy of electrons and positrons) M. Koratzinos9

10. Z energy calibration The solution (brute-force if you want) if one needs ultimate precision is to – Measure resonant depolarization every few minutes – Measure independently electrons and positrons – Measure continuously from the beginning of physics to the end of physics M. Koratzinos10

11. Resonant depolarization measurement The measurement consists of measuring the spin precession frequency by introducing a resonance in a ‘random walk’ fashion. – Failure: nothing observed, the frequency used not the correct one – Success: the bunch depolarizes, the frequency corresponds to the exact energy at that moment For the measurement one needs levels of polarization of 5-10% (the better the polarimeter, the smaller the value) – I hope we will have a good polarimeter! One bunch is targeted at a time This bunch should be a non-colliding bunch M. Koratzinos11

12. The problem Polarization times at FCC-ee and CEPC are very large: – TLEP-45GeV: 250 hours – CEPC-45GeV: 42 hours – (TLEP 80GeV: 9 hours) As we only need polarization levels of 5-10%, you can divide the above numbers by 10 to 20. But this is still too long. One solution is to use wigglers to decrease polarization time to something manageable. M. Koratzinos12

13. Wigglers – the flip side Wigglers have two undesired effects: They increase the energy spread They contribute to the SR power budget of your machine Strategy is to use them is such a way that – The energy spread is less than some manageable number (so that no resonances are encountered). This number was determined by A. Blondel to be between 48MeV and 58MeV, say 52MeV “for the sake of discussion”, judging from the LEP experience – Switch them on only where necessary M. Koratzinos13

14. LEP wigglers As proof of concept, A. Blondel has suggested the use of the old LEP wigglers to decrease polarization time M. Koratzinos14 Quick and dirty design, troublesome operationally B- B+ (B-=B+/6.25)

15. Polarization time vs induced energy spread Using the equations of LEP note 606 “Dedicated wigglers for polarization” by Blondel/Jowett: M. Koratzinos15 52MeV By using wiglers we can decrease polarization time to 23 hours (TLEP) and 7.5 hours (CEPC). This means that useful polarization levels (5- 10%) are reached after 70-140 mins (TLEP) and 22-45 minutes (CEPC). Interestingly, this does not depend on the number of wigglers installed (just need a higher field per wiggler) By using wiglers we can decrease polarization time to 23 hours (TLEP) and 7.5 hours (CEPC). This means that useful polarization levels (5- 10%) are reached after 70-140 mins (TLEP) and 22-45 minutes (CEPC). Interestingly, this does not depend on the number of wigglers installed (just need a higher field per wiggler)

16. SR budget MachineEnergyNo. of wigglers B+Polarizati on time Energy spread Wiggler SR power TLEP4500253 hours17MeV0 TLEP45120.62T21 hours52MeV20MW TLEP4511.35T24 hours52MeV9MW CEPC450041 hours23MeV0 CEPC45120.72T7 hours52MeV17MW CEPC4511.58T7 hours52MeV7 M. Koratzinos16 Work in progress! The SR budget for a single wiggler looks manageable, especially considering that they can be switched off after a short period of time Wigglers introduce more damping and might help to achieve higher beam-beam parameters partly compensating the loss due to wiggler SR power– to be investigated

17. Duration of wiggler operation The wigglers need to be on just enough time to polarise enough non-colliding bunches: – TLEP: 250 non-colliding bunches – CEPC: 40 non-colliding bunches They can be switched on as soon as the machine starts filling up (which takes ~30 mins) They can be switched off when 5% polarization is achieved – TLEP: 40 minutes after filling is completed – CEPC: ready after filling has been completed Using and replacing 5 bunches for 5 depolarization measurements per hour, the machine will have naturally polarized to 5% by the time the last non-colliding bunches are exhausted. M. Koratzinos17

18. Future work Check the toy model to optimise wiggler size/magnetic field Simulate! (and to simulate, one needs a code…) M. Koratzinos18

19. End M. Koratzinos19

20. Backup slides M. Koratzinos20

21. Fill-up time (TLEP) According to our recent parameter document (EDMS 1346082): – “The required flux of e + and of e - is currently estimated to ≥2x10 12 particles/s for each species.” I have used 2E12 particles/s and a bhabha lifetime of 200 mins. This results in a fill up time at the Z of 28 minutes: M. Koratzinos21